Author Topic: Statistically speaking?  (Read 1872 times)

TimC

  • Old blerk sometimes onabike.
Re: Statistically speaking?
« Reply #25 on: April 12, 2020, 05:52:41 pm »
Out yesterday and I was surprised how many essential journeys were taking place on high powered motorbikes or in convertible cars.

Having not been shopping for a couple of weeks, and having one convertible car that hasn't moved for a couple of months, it will be jimmied into action at some point this week to go and get some foodstuffs. No doubt someone will tut, but tough.

Socks

  • Clennel Street on my touring bike
Re: Statistically speaking?
« Reply #26 on: April 12, 2020, 06:01:25 pm »
The shitehawks all fucked off shortly after the bulk of the students.  It's mostly corvids and hedge-dwelling tweety things now.  Not sure about flying rats, they're more of a high street phenomenon.

Corvids - were there 19 of them?


andytheflyer

  • Andytheex-flyer.....
Re: Statistically speaking?
« Reply #27 on: April 12, 2020, 09:46:29 pm »
Out yesterday and I was surprised how many essential journeys were taking place on high powered motorbikes or in convertible cars.

Having not been shopping for a couple of weeks, and having one convertible car that hasn't moved for a couple of months, it will be jimmied into action at some point this week to go and get some foodstuffs. No doubt someone will tut, but tough.
The thought has occurred to me that I could throw a couple of panniers over my 1972 Triumph and go shopping.  I need to go shopping, and no-one's said that I have to go by car......

TimC

  • Old blerk sometimes onabike.
Re: Statistically speaking?
« Reply #28 on: April 13, 2020, 07:39:54 am »
Seems perfectly reasonable to me. I don’t think only politically-correct modes of transport have been made mandatory yet!

Re: Statistically speaking?
« Reply #29 on: April 13, 2020, 07:54:58 am »
“Shop for basic necessities as infrequently as possible”. If you have a choice of transport pick the one that best achieves this.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

TimC

  • Old blerk sometimes onabike.
Re: Statistically speaking?
« Reply #30 on: April 13, 2020, 08:21:43 am »
“Shop for basic necessities as infrequently as possible”. If you have a choice of transport pick the one that best achieves this.


As I live on my own, and so far have managed with just one shopping expedition since the lockdown started (and that mainly for an elderly neighbour), I don’t think my choice of shopping vehicle is particularly contentious. I can get enough shopping in my ‘cock extension’ convertible (thanks, ElyDave, I’m keeping that one!) to last me at least a month. It’s done about 200 miles total this year, so it does need to be used to keep everything turning. But I know some will look scathingly at me and accuse me of having fun when I shouldn’t be, simply because the car is somewhat frivolous.

Re: Statistically speaking?
« Reply #31 on: April 13, 2020, 08:43:12 am »
My comment was more regarding the motorbike / car choice. The guidance on what “as infrequently as possible” means is “about once a week”. This is to balance the need for food including fresh fruit and veg with the risk of transmission. I was considering getting a trailer for my bike instead of driving but my wife explained this was not the time to be going through a divorce.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Mr Larrington

  • A bit ov a lyv wyr by slof standirds
  • Custard Wallah
    • Mr Larrington's Automatic Diary
Re: Statistically speaking?
« Reply #32 on: April 13, 2020, 11:46:43 am »
The shitehawks all fucked off shortly after the bulk of the students.  It's mostly corvids and hedge-dwelling tweety things now.  Not sure about flying rats, they're more of a high street phenomenon.

In spite of the shortages, some truly Morganesque bellend is still putting food out for the flying rats on the pavement opposite Larrington Towers, and if ever I find out where the miscreant lives there will be Trouble, probably involving arson or high explosives.
External Transparent Wall Inspection Operative & Mayor of Mortagne-au-Perche
Satisfying the Bloodlust of the Masses in Peacetime

TimC

  • Old blerk sometimes onabike.
Re: Statistically speaking?
« Reply #33 on: April 13, 2020, 12:29:24 pm »
My comment was more regarding the motorbike / car choice. The guidance on what “as infrequently as possible” means is “about once a week”. This is to balance the need for food including fresh fruit and veg with the risk of transmission. I was considering getting a trailer for my bike instead of driving but my wife explained this was not the time to be going through a divorce.

I did used to have - and regularly used - a bike and trailer combo for shopping. Where I live now requires some fast A Road negotiation (with Hills) to get to a shop by bike, and I lost the will to do it on something so heavy and unmanoeuvrable. I don’t feel anywhere near as vulnerable on a solo, which is probably irrational, but my shopping capacity thus equipped would require at least two trips a week. Once every three weeks or so by cock-extension seems safer.

Kim

  • Timelord
Re: Statistically speaking?
« Reply #34 on: April 13, 2020, 01:28:13 pm »
I know some will look scathingly at me and accuse me of having fun when I shouldn’t be, simply because the car is somewhat frivolous.

Most cars are frivolous.  *shrug*

We need to stop judging people for having fun in ways that are unrelated to transmitting the virus.
Careful, Kim. Your sarcasm's showing...

Cudzoziemiec

  • Eating all the pies and drinking all the tea.
Re: Statistically speaking?
« Reply #35 on: April 13, 2020, 01:33:01 pm »
Or: We need to judge people on things that actually matter and over which they have some control, like how they behave and what they say, rather than superficial things like the symmetricality of their bonnet extension.
Faster than a walk, slower than a train, often slightly higher than a person. (David Byrne)

mattc

  • n.b. have grown beard since photo taken
    • Didcot Audaxes
Re: Statistically speaking?
« Reply #36 on: April 13, 2020, 01:41:17 pm »


We need to stop judging people for having fun in ways that are unrelated to transmitting the virus.
Trouble with that is you're taking away *their* only source of fun.  ::-)
Has never ridden RAAM
---------
No.11  Because of the great host of those who dislike the least appearance of "swank " when they travel the roads and lanes. - From Kuklos' 39 Articles

TimC

  • Old blerk sometimes onabike.
Re: Statistically speaking?
« Reply #37 on: April 13, 2020, 06:43:21 pm »
Or: We need to judge people on things that actually matter and over which they have some control, like how they behave and what they say, rather than superficial things like the symmetricality of their bonnet extension.

Oh no! It's got to be symmetrical??!

Cudzoziemiec

  • Eating all the pies and drinking all the tea.
Re: Statistically speaking?
« Reply #38 on: April 13, 2020, 07:03:59 pm »
Not if it's Rapha.  ;)
Faster than a walk, slower than a train, often slightly higher than a person. (David Byrne)

Re: Statistically speaking?
« Reply #39 on: April 14, 2020, 12:30:23 pm »
I'm surprised at how much traffic there still is on the roads around here. If this is 1955 levels, there was much more traffic in 1955 than I would have thought!


Kim

  • Timelord
Re: Statistically speaking?
« Reply #40 on: April 14, 2020, 12:55:01 pm »
I'm surprised at how much traffic there still is on the roads around here. If this is 1955 levels, there was much more traffic in 1955 than I would have thought!

I am curious about where all these people are going.  Especially over the bank holiday weekend.

OTOH, maybe it just looks like a lot of traffic because they're using cars.
Careful, Kim. Your sarcasm's showing...

Regulator

  • That's Councillor Regulator to you...
Re: Statistically speaking?
« Reply #41 on: April 14, 2020, 01:54:28 pm »
What appeared to be underaged twats on an unplated scrambler bike, blatting along the farm tracks yesterday - dodging the various walkers, dogs and cyclists legitimately using the permissive paths.  My friend the farmer was not far behind in pursuit.
Quote from: clarion
I completely agree with Reg.

Green Party Councillor

Cudzoziemiec

  • Eating all the pies and drinking all the tea.
Re: Statistically speaking?
« Reply #42 on: April 14, 2020, 02:07:49 pm »
I'm surprised at how much traffic there still is on the roads around here. If this is 1955 levels, there was much more traffic in 1955 than I would have thought!

I am curious about where all these people are going.  Especially over the bank holiday weekend.

OTOH, maybe it just looks like a lot of traffic because they're using cars.
The 1955 figure related specifically to levels of cars moving on the roads, not people. And it was from the beginning of lockdown; I get the feeling levels have crept up since then.
Faster than a walk, slower than a train, often slightly higher than a person. (David Byrne)